negative: - Sigma colors are present in this lens as well, so a bit of a yellowcast. The 35L has more red/blue coloring and gave the photo's more spark/vivid/positive feel to it. The yellowcast from the Sigma is not perse my favorite. Though it bothers me little and goes away in postprocessing in a flash

Awesome. Thanks for the review!

With regard to the "yellowcast" are we talking a white balance type of cast, or something a bit more complex?

negative: - Sigma colors are present in this lens as well, so a bit of a yellowcast. The 35L has more red/blue coloring and gave the photo's more spark/vivid/positive feel to it. The yellowcast from the Sigma is not perse my favorite. Though it bothers me little and goes away in postprocessing in a flash

Awesome. Thanks for the review!

With regard to the "yellowcast" are we talking a white balance type of cast, or something a bit more complex?

I always shoot RAW, so if it were a mere whitebalance problem I would hardly notice it, because whitebalance is the first thing I do in post processing. It is as you "a bit more complex". But still well able to be corrected.The cast is definitely not a show-stopper to get this lens btw and I don't see it in all the photos.

FYI- if you follow that link that was posted a page or so ago to that korean site you'll see a very nice side-by-side with the sigma and canon. And if you dig a bit deeper (page2) you'll find the same side-by-side stuff with the sigma -vs- others. namely a converted Contax, the Samyang. if you want to skip to the end, just know the sigma beats them all.

Those Korean links really pushed the OoF rendition to the limits, naked branches + leaves make the busiest backgrounds, IMO. I don't think I saw nice bokeh examples from any of the 35/1.4 lenses on that site, be it canon, samjunk, contax, nikkor or sigma.

photozone guys always mentions how he's never seen a really great bokeh from a wide or semi wide lens, esp one with an asph element. it looks like it can be nice sometimes, maybe 8/10 times, but then there are times when it's just a mess. from what i've found though, it doesn't take much of a distance/framing change to really change the OOF rendering with these wider lenses. i guess it's like most things with wide lenses, a few inches here of there, and you have something very different.

I recall from the 5D III manual that third party lenses are not able to use as many of the focus points as Canon's. For lenses like this one, whose optical performance and focusing speed seem to be on par with Canon's, is that the only downside?

Have the 5d3 and 35mm 1.4 Sigma and can use all the AF points like my L 2.8 glass can on the camera. All 45 cross and 61 points are usable.

This is the post from Lensrentals where I had partly gotten the idea that this wasn't necessarily the case:

Going by that, it seems likely the Sigma would be group C at best, all points but no dual cross points, whereas the Canon 35 is in group A, so a very small reduction in AF ability.

I read some speculation as to whether the 5D3 is looking at the lens model, or if there is a test using other methods to determine how many of the focus points can be used. Some here with a reply from Canon that does not fully resolve the question:

How did you confirm the camera uses the full point array with all 45 points as cross points? In a similar way of checking the points for focus functionality? Any idea if any are functioning as dual cross?

negative: - Sigma colors are present in this lens as well, so a bit of a yellowcast. The 35L has more red/blue coloring and gave the photo's more spark/vivid/positive feel to it. The yellowcast from the Sigma is not perse my favorite. Though it bothers me little and goes away in postprocessing in a flash

Awesome. Thanks for the review!

With regard to the "yellowcast" are we talking a white balance type of cast, or something a bit more complex?

Wow, that was by far the most interesting review of the lens I have read so far, and very eye opening. Their conclusion was that this was the best overall 35mm f/1.4 lens they have ever tested (including Canon, Nikon, Sony, Samyang, and Zeiss equivalents). In many tests it blows everything else away. It stumbles only with very strong vignetting (something I personally don't care a lot about, particularly as [to me] if often suits the style of photographer one does with large aperture primes) and the bokeh isn't as fabulous as it could be.

Sharpness, however, is off the charts...almost literally. Very impressive, Sigma, very impressive.

given that the bokeh quality is, to my eye, better than the Canon L's ... it's all relative since we can't all go out and make our own perfect lens. better than the current gold (or red) standard is definitely good enough in my book.